spalco wrote:If I'm Froome and Wiggins gets the team's support just for being ahead a couple seconds at some arbitrary cut-off point, I would **** **** up in the race and switch teams ASAP. He deserves this. Wiggins chose the Giro, if he'd said after the Tour 2012 "I'm going to repeat the win in 2013", that would have been the end of the discussion, but he didn't. He made his choice and if he's not able to live with it now, he can't expect Froome to play nice.

Wiggins didnt make the choice after the tour. What you are saying is that someone like froome, in the form of his life, which wont last for ever, is voluntarily going to waste their season serving wiggins in whatever race wiggins wants to win.

Thats not how life works. Nothing comes free. Sky made it clear Froome was promised the 2013 tour. That was his reward for being superdomestique in a TDF he was the strongest, and for essentially wasting his peak for the season - (with which he could have won the giro or the vuelta) on serving wiggins.

Wiggins was asked before the tour- do you want to win the Tour with Froome - best climber in the world, pacing you up every single climb and being your total ***** for 3 weeks, or do you want to try and win it without him.

If yes, then youll have to let him be leader for the 2013 tour.

Looked like a very attractive proposition with london 2012 around the corner and the chance to be a "hero" and to open the ceremony and all that.

The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

The Hitch wrote:Wiggins didnt make the choice after the tour. What you are saying is that someone like froome, in the form of his life, which wont last for ever, is voluntarily going to waste their season serving wiggins in whatever race wiggins wants to win.

Well, no, quite the contrary, you totally misunderstood. I think we're actually agreeing with each other.

What I said (and meant) was that if Wiggins had said after the Tour last year, that he wants to win it again the next year, everything would have been clear, and Froome could have prepared his 2013 season accordingly (probably targetting the Giro himself). But that didn't happen, and now Wiggins wants to move the goalposts in the middle of the season, completely screwing Froome over in the process.

eta: it's true that promises were made to Froome regarding 2013 and the Tour de France, but he had to know that wasn't set in stone. But after planning out the 2013 season, it definitely should have been. Froome did waste the 2012 season if you look at it that way, but being allowed to race the Giro as a leader, plus maybe the Vuelta should have been an acceptable payoff to him imo.

The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

What I said (and meant) was that if Wiggins had said after the Tour last year, that he wants to win it again the next year, everything would have been clear, and Froome could have prepared his 2013 season accordingly (probably targetting the Giro himself).

Well, and I see from your edit that you understand why, Froome would not in a million years accept that deal and peak for the giro.

If someone hires you to do a job, you spend a month working your *** of to do it, and after you finish it they say- actually were not going to pay you the 10 grand we promised you, but heres a couple of vouchers to macdonalds to cheer you up, well your not going to take that sitting down are you;)

The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

I think the issue stems from the fact that Wiggins, on some kind of winning high right after the TDF, said he would help Froome win the TDF and ride for him.

Now, he is saying, the racing will determine it. Which isn't exactly incorrect. Froome might crash out or something, who knows, and the first week the last 5-7 years has been a complete crashfest and disaster for some riders. Froome isn't immune.

So in that respect, although Wiggins might say he will support him, it really will take at least the first week of racing and get everyone through safely to then say, hey, Froome is the leader.

I must say, Froome has been very vocal and started this whole thing as of late proclaiming he is the TDF leader this year. Then Wiggins makes a statement, and now Froome is releasing more stuff saying he is....

But, sorry to say about Froome. I think he is just trying to garner public support with these statements in the media. Because the people that really decide, team management, haven't said a single word as to who the leader is. They will say and determine the leader, not Froome. If Froome isn't the leader, what is he going to do? Not race hard? Quit? Yeah, good luck finding a new job not working with other people in the cycling biz.

So at this point, Froome might just be full of crap and trying to manipulate a team leader role in the media/press/public.

The Hitch wrote:Well, and I see from your edit that you understand why, Froome would not in a million years accept that deal and peak for the giro.

If someone hires you to do a job, you spend a month working your *** of to do it, and after you finish it they say- actually were not going to pay you the 10 grand we promised you, but heres a couple of vouchers to macdonalds to cheer you up, well your not going to take that sitting down are you;)

True, and I understand your point.

However, what's happening now, or may happen now, is even worse, because Sky is on the verge of completely ****ing up Froome's 2013 season as well, which was unneccesary any way you put it.

Well, talking about this season I doubt Froome wouln't have accepted a leader role only in the giro. I mean, just look at the parcours. Froome actually could win 5 or 6 stages easily while making the Patani-Show, Il piccolo principe, Robo-Basso and Grandissimo-Emanuele nearly forgotten.

Froome has a decent enough sprint to win uphill finishes out of a favourite group. Especially against comeptitors like Nibali, Hesjedal and older/weaker Delfino/ Sanchez/ Scarponi. He would be cleary the strongest rider in the tt's, but he has also become a top level climber and he has some explosiveness in favour of Nibali&co to attack them in the mountains and win solo.

So if Wiggings would've decided early on to defend his yellow jersey and wouldn't have been frightened of coming back Contador, like a little baby. Of course Froome would've accepted his new role to rock the giro. And it's not that Wiggings didn't had the opportunity again at the beginning of the year to rebuild his calendar and main season goals.

But it's now where Froome has build up his whole season to peak for the Tour that Wiggins realizes that Contador just might be not strong enough this summer, so that Wiggins could be able to win the Tour again if his train is dragging him up towards the mountains again. That way Wiggings is suggesting to ruin Froome's 3rd Grand Tour in a row, which he actually could've (Tour 2012) or even would've (Vuelta 2011) won. It's just natural that Froome and his chick are going mad about that. Wiggings is so pathetic.

And as much as I hate the that whole Team Sky construction and their laughable transformation of medicore riders into top climbers (Especially Froome & Porte) I have to admit that I can't hide some symphaty for the Kenyan. At the time when Froome and his chiquita are going loco and Froome stops playing nice and becoming more-and-more a controversial blatherskite in honour of il Cobra I will even begin to love this guy.

I feel too much honouring and admiring feelings in the words of many when speaking about Froome girlfriend.

As a former advertisement model and stripper (I was young and needed the money ), I´d say:

Her looks:
Good, but average good body shape. Nice, but not super pretty face. Her looks are good, better than Wiggins´ wife looks, but not stunningly good.

Her behaviour:
She´s a fotographer, I don´t have a clue about her job, she might be good, average or bad, no idea. She seems to switch focus to Froome´s job too often, and relies (or seems to rely) too much on his salaries. That´s what a lot of women do, OK. But, be sure, she knows if Froome wins TdF one day and is millionaire, he will have approach to other categories of women. She is afraid of that.

Her mouth:
Rather a child or adolescent than a grown-up woman. The more Froome is a professional, the less she is. She doesn´t do him a faith in being so outspoken. She won´t change anything, anyways. Brailsford is the man who decides at Sky, not a semi time photographer hungry for big money, devestatedly trying to keep her Monaco lifestyle.

I´m not a twitter user, so could someone give her the link to my post here? Thanks, appreciated :D

staubsauger wrote:Well, talking about this season I doubt Froome wouln't have accepted a leader role only in the giro. I mean, just look at the parcours. Froome actually could win 5 or 6 stages easily while making the Patani-Show, Il piccolo principe, Robo-Basso and Grandissimo-Emanuele nearly forgotten.

Froome has a decent enough sprint to win uphill finishes out of a favourite group. Especially against comeptitors like Nibali, Hesjedal and older/weaker Delfino/ Sanchez/ Scarponi. He would be cleary the strongest rider in the tt's, but he has also become a top level climber and he has some explosiveness in favour of Nibali&co to attack them in the mountains and win solo.

So if Wiggings would've decided early on to defend his yellow jersey nd wouldn't have been frightened of coming back Contador, like a little baby. Of course Froome would've accepted his new role to rock the giro. And it's not that Wiggings didn't have the opportunity again at the beginning of the year to rebuild his calendar and main season goals.

But it's now where Froome has build up his whole season to peak for the Tour that Wiggins realizes that Contador just might be not strong enough this summer, so that Wiggins could be able to win the Tour again if his train is dragging him up towards the mountains again. That way Wiggings is suggesting to ruin Froome's 3rd Grand Tour in a row, which he actually could've (Tour 2012) or even would've (Vuelta 2011) won. It's just natural that Froome and his chick are going mad about that. Wiggings is so pathetic.

And as much as I hate the that whole Team Sky construction and their laughable transformation of medicore riders into top climbers (Especially Froome & Porte) I have to admit that I can't hide some symphaty for the Kenyan. At the time when Froome and his chiquita are going loco and Froome stops playing nice and becoming more-and-more a controversial blatherskite in honour of il Cobra I will even began to love this guy.

I agree. To suggest (prior to Contadors ban) that Wiggins could have beaten Contador in a GT would have been laughable. Now it looks a possibility. Wiggins possibly aimed for the Giro purely to avoid humiliation at the hands of Contador.

I know you are a fanboy who doesn't look at the facts, but Froome never won a GT in his life. The last GT won was by a guy called Alberto Contador, who actually won a few GT's more than that.

What you could say is that Froome has a better form today than AC, but saying he and Wiggo are the best GT riders in the world is flat out ridiculously wrong.

In fact your statement is objectively false so I really do wonder how your thought progress goes... do you just shut out every rider that doesn't wear your favourite jersey?

If all that matters is a number of won GT, yes, Contador is and will be the best GT rider at least during 5 future years regardless his results. However if we talk about actual today's strength (the things we've seen for the last and this season) it is Wiggins and Froome no doubt.

airstream wrote:If all that matters is a number of won GT, yes, Contador is and will be the best GT rider at least during 5 future years regardless his results. However if we talk about actual today's strength (the things we've seen for the last and this season) it is Wiggins and Froome no doubt.

Contadors results this season are better than Wiggins. You can't say that Wiggins is superior to Contador based on a Tour that AC could not partake in

Contadoraus Schlecks wrote:I agree. To suggest (prior to Contadors ban) that Wiggins could have beaten Contador in a GT would have been laughable. Now it looks a possibility. Wiggins possibly aimed for the Giro purely to avoid humiliation at the hands of Contador.

I reckon Wiggins initially aimed at the Giro because the team management gently guided him down that path: "you'd really make history if you won the Giro, whereas two Tour wins is less historic" and Wiggins' ego agreed. Plus, Wiggins has said he hadn't enjoyed the Tour last year. Now the bad memories have faded, Tim K has had a look at the numbers, and the Tour is back on.

Contadoraus Schlecks wrote:Contadors results this season are better than Wiggins. You can't say that Wiggins is superior to Contador based on a Tour that AC could not partake in

He would never have won it if he participated. One could put his head on scaffold and not make a mistake. People underrated Sky boys monstrously both after Vuelta 11 and Tour 12. I'm sure Wiggins will disappoint many many people, beating Nibali on the climbs.

'Froome and Wiggins are much weaker than Contador' was one big artificial misleading and we get confirmation of this in this season. Sky are disliked so hugely that... not a lot of people can judge it in cold blood

rolfrae wrote:I reckon Wiggins initially aimed at the Giro because the team management gently guided him down that path: "you'd really make history if you won the Giro, whereas two Tour wins is less historic" and Wiggins' ego agreed. Plus, Wiggins has said he hadn't enjoyed the Tour last year. Now the bad memories have faded, Tim K has had a look at the numbers, and the Tour is back on.

Forgot about Wiggins saying that, well, if he didn't enjoy that Tour...

Wiggins was asked before the tour- do you want to win the Tour with Froome - best climber in the world, pacing you up every single climb and being your total ***** for 3 weeks, or do you want to try and win it without him.

If yes, then youll have to let him be leader for the 2013 tour.

Looked like a very attractive proposition with london 2012 around the corner and the chance to be a "hero" and to open the ceremony and all that.

Hate to be a pedant, but do you have a link for that? Is that actually a real conversation you're quoting a report of, or an imaginary one?

I hate all this team planning in any case - like Webber getting the hump in that race earlier this year cos he couldn't drive his fast car in a circle as fast as his team mate.

OK, in some cases if you're going to help the opposition you shouldn't attack someone on the road (Froome stopping at Tousiairre (sp?) last year was probably right to stop I think), but if there's no real risk other being better than the 'leader' then you should go - I think Froome should have tried to chase down Valverde in that last mountain stage last year, and I loved it when Contador just rode away into Andorra in 2009. It is, after all, a race.

So I think what Wiggins is saying at the moment is fair enough - if (best case scenario) it comes to it, he wants the road to decide. I think in that scenario Froome will beat him - but what's a better outcome for Froome and his place in history: winning with Wiggins hinting he could have won but didn't try, or winning with Wiggins having tried and failed to compete and there being no discussion about the 'strongest' rider at the tour? If he doesn't think he can actually beat Wiggins, maybe he's in the wrong job?

I'm guessing Wiggins originally chose to ride the Giro to avoid Contador, being afraid of being spanked by Contador. Now that he has seen Contador's form this season, he wants to ride the Tour again for the bragging rights of beating Contador....